Once again I'll point out how Bettman did this very thing seven years ago, that you are criticizing Fehr for doing.

So basically it is once again take our offer or we walk away from the table. It doesn't matter that they were close to a deal, it matters that they show the PA who is boss and that the league says when negotiations end, right? Awesome.

Here is a simple question:

What is the difference between UFA contract length being 5 years or 6 and 7, when the league was going to give 7 on re-signs?

Explain to me how giving another year or two has any affect on what the owners want.

By the sound of it, length of contract isn't the ONLY thing they changed. I think they would meet in the middle and not care. I really do. I think it was a total slap to the face after Tuesdays discussion to come in there like hard ***** and change everything they discussed. That was weak and terrible. Terrible move.

Even though it's the "hill they will die on", I bet they will agree on something different. It was the fact of the matter that everything was agreed upon and then changed last minute. I don't know what else to tell you. You have to look at all the steps from this week to see it. You can't take it all... you just can't. Parameters were set up and the PA thought they could take what the Owners gave AND negotiate more. It was a ****ing joke.

The "without Fehr in the room" thing is being a tad overblown. Firstly, it was stupid for an owner to say that but D.Fehr knew exactly what was going on in the room, decided the players could get more and shut things down.

The 5 and 7 year thing is really just to idiot proof things for the overspending GM's and owners. 5 or 7 with the 5% variance almost guarentees GM's and agents can't find any loopholes. I think theres some wiggle room if the PA gave in on something else.

If i'm the PA i'd come back to the league with "we're willing to sign a 10yr CBA if we get a year or 2 tacked on to the limits." They'd have a deal within hours if that happened.

Amnesty buyouts and escrow limits are just stall tactics like delinkage. Notice no one is talking about delinkage now.

By the sound of it, length of contract isn't the ONLY thing they changed. I think they would meet in the middle and not care. I really do. I think it was a total slap to the face after Tuesdays discussion to come in there like hard ***** and change everything they discussed. That was weak and terrible. Terrible move.

Even though it's the "hill they will die on", I bet they will agree on something different. It was the fact of the matter that everything was agreed upon and then changed last minute. I don't know what else to tell you. You have to look at all the steps from this week to see it. You can't take it all... you just can't. Parameters were set up and the PA thought they could take what the Owners gave AND negotiate more. It was a ****ing joke.

Cole, you have always displayed as much common sense as anyone on here. Step back and look at the entire situation...

You can't reasonably tell me what happened on Thursday is quality leadership from Bettman and the league. They are taking things personally and going after Fehr. I'm not the only one who sees through the charade. A ton of media people see it as well.

Quote:

“The answer wasn’t yes,” Bettman said.

The answer wasn’t no, either. It was a new union proposal that ignored the owners’ specific request. This, and Fehr’s press conference to inform the media that the parties were close to an agreement, drove the billionaires up a wall. But overlooked amid the fury was that the union and the NHL were closer than ever on two of the issues the league “had to have:” reducing player contract term limits from unlimited to a five-year maximum (the union proposed an eight-year limit) and signing a 10-year, long-term collective bargaining agreement (the union proposed an eight-year pact). The NHL contended its offer was a “package deal” — not items to be bargained individually — but if the league had not been blinded by its tug-of-war with Fehr, it may have actually recognized the progress achieved.

They are going after a man who doesn't care about the game and is leaving after this mess is over. The league's actions are hurting not only the players, but themselves as well. Both sides are going to lose big the further this drags on.

The league had a chance to suck it up on Thursday and give just a little more, and it would not have affected their actual goals, and this nightmare would of been over. Quality leadership would of understood that with the stakes so high.

But they are too busy trying to get Fehr to see the forest through the trees.

Cole, you have always displayed as much common sense as anyone on here. Step back and look at the entire situation...

You can't reasonably tell me what happened on Thursday is quality leadership from Bettman and the league. They are taking things personally and going after Fehr. I'm not the only one who sees through the charade. A ton of media people see it as well.

They are going after a man who doesn't care about the game and is leaving after this mess is over. The league's actions are hurting not only the players, but themselves as well. Both sides are going to lose big the further this drags on.

The league had a chance to suck it up on Thursday and give just a little more, and it would not have affected their actual goals, and this nightmare would of been over. Quality leadership would of understood that with the stakes so high.

But they are too busy trying to get Fehr to see the forest through the trees.

We might disagree on a lot, but I cannot disagree with you that Bettman is wrong by just attacking Fehr. He's fed up. The reason... even all the fans knew there would be a work stoppage AS SOON as we found our Fehr would be dealing with this. We knew it. They knew it. Everyone knew it. Does that make it right for Bettman to keep attacking Fehr? No. But it's beyond ridiculous now. This is Donald Fehr's game. He can get people to lose a **** load of money on the promise that a fair deal will be given. It's hilarious. It's beyond a joke.

But nonetheless, you are right. They shouldn't be attacking one another. Nobody is right in this situation and we all lose. They should have stayed and worked through the weekend. But it's still a TERRIBLE game that Fehr played. And then taking offense to it is just as bad.

It's a game being played by 3 year olds right now. It's an embarrassment. I felt the owners have been very legit and honest through this entire process. They give deadlines and are very serious. Fehr plays ****ing games. Let's get this finished.

We might disagree on a lot, but I cannot disagree with you that Bettman is wrong by just attacking Fehr. He's fed up. The reason... even all the fans knew there would be a work stoppage AS SOON as we found our Fehr would be dealing with this. We knew it. They knew it. Everyone knew it. Does that make it right for Bettman to keep attacking Fehr? No. But it's beyond ridiculous now. This is Donald Fehr's game. He can get people to lose a **** load of money on the promise that a fair deal will be given. It's hilarious. It's beyond a joke.

But nonetheless, you are right. They shouldn't be attacking one another. Nobody is right in this situation and we all lose. They should have stayed and worked through the weekend. But it's still a TERRIBLE game that Fehr played. And then taking offense to it is just as bad.

It's a game being played by 3 year olds right now. It's an embarrassment. I felt the owners have been very legit and honest through this entire process. They give deadlines and are very serious. Fehr plays ****ing games. Let's get this finished.

Nobody maybe a winner, but getting mad about an owner putting his foot in the sand about his own business is ridicules.

There's being fair, and then there's being stupid.

Ok, I'll be nice, do you want your pie after you just had your cake, and do you want some whip creme and a cherry on top too?

Please.

Those big bad owners sure kept them from taking the 82 game 50/50 make whole 211 deal.

Cole, you have always displayed as much common sense as anyone on here. Step back and look at the entire situation...

You can't reasonably tell me what happened on Thursday is quality leadership from Bettman and the league. They are taking things personally and going after Fehr. I'm not the only one who sees through the charade. A ton of media people see it as well.

They are going after a man who doesn't care about the game and is leaving after this mess is over. The league's actions are hurting not only the players, but themselves as well. Both sides are going to lose big the further this drags on.

The league had a chance to suck it up on Thursday and give just a little more, and it would not have affected their actual goals, and this nightmare would of been over. Quality leadership would of understood that with the stakes so high.

But they are too busy trying to get Fehr to see the forest through the trees.

I look at it opposite

The NHLPA had chance Wed to give just a little more and end this ,, They blew it and Fehr killed process

We might disagree on a lot, but I cannot disagree with you that Bettman is wrong by just attacking Fehr. He's fed up. The reason... even all the fans knew there would be a work stoppage AS SOON as we found our Fehr would be dealing with this. We knew it. They knew it. Everyone knew it. Does that make it right for Bettman to keep attacking Fehr? No. But it's beyond ridiculous now. This is Donald Fehr's game. He can get people to lose a **** load of money on the promise that a fair deal will be given. It's hilarious. It's beyond a joke.

But nonetheless, you are right. They shouldn't be attacking one another. Nobody is right in this situation and we all lose. They should have stayed and worked through the weekend. But it's still a TERRIBLE game that Fehr played. And then taking offense to it is just as bad.

It's a game being played by 3 year olds right now. It's an embarrassment. I felt the owners have been very legit and honest through this entire process. They give deadlines and are very serious. Fehr plays ****ing games. Let's get this finished.

I'm livid as hell also, but I expect the leadership to finish this to come from Bettman and the owners. The old Swedish proverb rings so true here:

"Rough Waters Are Truer Tests Of Leadership. In Calm Water Every Ship Has A Good Captain."

The NHLPA had chance Wed to give just a little more and end this ,, They blew it and Fehr killed process

Or put another way, the NHLPA [were close to] a deal in principle that addressed all their core needs, and instead of least voting on it, they shelved the whole process / pissed the owners off on their "new thing", pensions. And then bringing Fehr in. Nobody has said jack about pensions this entire process, now all of a sudden pensions are the hang-up?! After the league adds a ton of make whole money, tacks two years onto FA contract length (and leaves UFA / RFA rules untouched) to address player financial security and home town favorites for fans... the PA comes up with... pensions?

**** off, Don. To me this is evidence the players don't really get what's happening because everytime Fehr says "Ask for more", no one says "hey this is pretty good, let's get a vote before asking for more; maybe this can work." They just take what he says without question. The motivations for that can range from greed to spiting Bettman to "best intentions" but it doesn't matter. They screwed up Thursday.

Even if the NHL DOES have weak leadership (which I don't question that's the case), that does not preclude the possibility of signing a deal under various circumstances.

The players have no right to push, but the owners have a right to push back to fairness, and even if they go beyond that, they (players) had it coming for decades.

Please. Learn about the labor history of the NHL. You read one article and "the players had it coming".

What are we, three years old?

Read about the ******** the owners pulled for decades. Teams back in the 50s and 60s lied about how much they made (sound familiar) and players were told the league would fold if they took too much. When the players tried to unionize, the leaders got traded or sent to the minors.

Do some research on the BS that was pulled on Howe by Norris. Howe trusted him and gave himself only incremental raises each year....

When a player was drafted and signed with a team, he gave up his lifetime rights to sign with a new team. Players weren't even allowed to have copies of their contracts. If a player requested to look at their contract, they got labeled as troublemakers.

Lets not forget the back room deals between the owners and Eagleson.

You have no idea how ****ed up it was for years. Now you want to claim the owners are victims. Get real.

Please. Learn about the labor history of the NHL. You read one article and "the players had it coming".

What are we, three years old?

Read about the ******** the owners pulled for decades. Teams back in the 50s and 60s lied about how much they made (sound familiar) and players were told the league would fold if they took too much. Do some research on the BS that was pulled on Howe by Norris. Howe trusted him and gave himself only incremental raises each year....

When a player was drafted and signed with a team, he gave up his lifetime rights to sign with a new team. Players weren't even allowed to have copies of their contracts. If a player requested to look at their contract, they got labeled as troublemakers.

Lets not forget the back room deals between the owners and Eagleson.

You have no idea how ****ed up it was for years. Now you want to claim the owners are victims. Get real.

Yes Jiggy - you are right the owners had it coming, and they got right between the eyes by the PA.

Problem is, the health of the game, and of your Pittsburgh Penguins, was not put seriously at risk by under-paying the players.

The entire sport was at risk when the players were pulling in 70%, and unlike under-paying the players, it was just not sustainable.

I'll remind you the Pens were one of the casualties.

Now feel free to go ahead and build emotionally driven logic bombs to prove I am wrong. And post them over and over and over again. Jiggy wins through sheer determination.... Again.

Yes Jiggy - you are right the owners had it coming, and they got right between the eyes by the PA.

Problem is, the health of the game, and of your Pittsburgh Penguins, was not put seriously at risk by under-paying the players.

The entire sport was at risk when the players were pulling in 70%, and unlike under-paying the players, it was just not sustainable.

I'll remind you the Pens were one of the casualties.

Now feel free to go ahead and build emotionally driven logic bombs to prove I am wrong. And post them over and over and over again. Jiggy wins through sheer determination.... Again.

Chancellor - how bout we name the new thread "Jiggy goes full Panda?"

Or we could call it the "lets post facts" thread instead of making up BS and thinking the owners are always in the right. I've asked you and the other blind anti-PA crowd to explain how another year or two, added to contract term affects what the owners hope to accomplish... I get the same rhetoric back and dancing around the question.

The Penguins were a casualty of Baldwin's poor decision making running the team into bankruptcy. He took a bridge loan from SMG leaving the team with only gate revenue and later leveraged off TV rights as well.

He then, foolishly, agt CP advice, gave Lemieux a guaranteed contract. Lemieux played only a couple of seasons of the contract, leaving close to 25-30m in dead money on the team books.

Then when the city approached him about building a new arena and going in on plan B with the Pirates and Steelers, he turned it down and instead accepted money for renovations for the Civic Arena.

Baldwin's poor choices put this team into bankruptcy, not BG. Again, facts.

God forbid a fair deal is worked out for both sides, like the NFL did.

It's much better to keep pushing past the 2000 games missed mark due to NHL labor strife, because the "players had it coming" and the owners want to get Fehr.

Or we could call it the "lets post facts" thread instead of making up BS and thinking the owners are always in the right. I've asked you and the other blind anti-PA crowd to explain how another year or two, added to contract term affects what the owners hope to accomplish... I get the same rhetoric back and dancing around the question.

The Penguins were a casualty of Baldwin's poor decision making running the team into bankruptcy. He took a bridge loan from SMG leaving the team with only gate revenue and later leveraged off TV rights as well.

He then, foolishly, agt CP advice, gave Lemieux a guaranteed contract. Lemieux played only a couple of seasons of the contract, leaving close to 25-30m in dead money on the team books.

Then when the city approached him about building a new arena and going in on plan B with the Pirates and Steelers, he turned it down and instead accepted money for renovations for the Civic Arena.

Baldwin's poor choices put this team into bankruptcy, not BG. Again, facts.

God forbid a fair deal is worked out for both sides, like the NFL did.

It's much better to keep pushing past the 2000 games missed mark due to NHL labor strife, because the "players had it coming" and the owners want to get Fehr.

Sound logic.

honest question-- seemingly most pens fans are "siding" with the owners. why do you think that is?

have we been misled by their PR campaign, or is it that most regular people are envious of athletes, or what?

Please. Learn about the labor history of the NHL. You read one article and "the players had it coming".

What are we, three years old?

Read about the ******** the owners pulled for decades. Teams back in the 50s and 60s lied about how much they made (sound familiar) and players were told the league would fold if they took too much. When the players tried to unionize, the leaders got traded or sent to the minors.

Do some research on the BS that was pulled on Howe by Norris. Howe trusted him and gave himself only incremental raises each year....

When a player was drafted and signed with a team, he gave up his lifetime rights to sign with a new team. Players weren't even allowed to have copies of their contracts. If a player requested to look at their contract, they got labeled as troublemakers.

Lets not forget the back room deals between the owners and Eagleson.

You have no idea how ****ed up it was for years. Now you want to claim the owners are victims. Get real.

And you could argue those years under Goodenow were "payback". It wasn't that long ago that players were making 74% of HRR.

It's really, really nice bringing up the days when players used to have to have part time jobs during the off-season. There's no doubt the players got screwed, but as the generations changed, the landscape changed and the players soon got the upper hand.

Here's the problem though.

None of US were around then way back when. Hell, the current owners weren't even around, and neither were the players. It's like asking country A to continue to feel responsible for atrocities committed against country B when EVERYONE involved is long gone and reparations have been paid in full.

It's not only history, it's ancient history and quite irrelevant to what's going on today. I guarantee you that a guy like Upshall, tweeting his beach pics doesn't give a **** about Lindsay or Howe, and what they did for him.

All I know is I was around when the players pulled that strike stunt under Goodenow. I even remember my reaction in wanting nothing more than Goodenow to stand under a falling piano with the rest of the players. I also remember the Kariya holdout when he pretty much spent half the season whining about "getting paid"

There is actually a difference between history and ANCIENT history. Bringing up that the players weren't allowed copies of their contracts when TODAY, even a healthy scratch player like Bisonnette gets every amenity under the sun in ADDITION to 500K a year is laughable.

Please. Learn about the labor history of the NHL. You read one article and "the players had it coming".

What are we, three years old?

Read about the ******** the owners pulled for decades. Teams back in the 50s and 60s lied about how much they made (sound familiar) and players were told the league would fold if they took too much. When the players tried to unionize, the leaders got traded or sent to the minors.

Do some research on the BS that was pulled on Howe by Norris. Howe trusted him and gave himself only incremental raises each year....

When a player was drafted and signed with a team, he gave up his lifetime rights to sign with a new team. Players weren't even allowed to have copies of their contracts. If a player requested to look at their contract, they got labeled as troublemakers.

Lets not forget the back room deals between the owners and Eagleson.

You have no idea how ****ed up it was for years. Now you want to claim the owners are victims. Get real.

Apple and Oranges, Jiggy.

We'll never see eye to eye, and I tried to jump out to only get sucked back in, and that was an act of a three year old mistake.

Get Jiggy with that fight to end all fights.

I know what happen in the early twentieth century, how about joining us in the twenty first century.

honest question-- seemingly most pens fans are "siding" with the owners. why do you think that is?

have we been misled by their PR campaign, or is it that most regular people are envious of athletes, or what?

No PR campaign should ever influence anyone with half a brain. It just comes down to simple logic, and logic is never wrong.

At some point, you see 12 people in the stands in Florida or Long Island and you understand that there are teams out there not making money.

You also look at guys like Troy Brouwer making 4M bucks as a reward for getting 33 points. I don't know how you look at a contract like that (and many like it) and not realize there's something really, really wrong here.

Oh, and you also look at the fact that the players will never, ever get the money back that they lost this year no matter how favorable a deal they MAY end up signing. Ironically, the reason they can hold out for so long just to prove a point is because they're already well compensated by those they're railing against.

Or we could call it the "lets post facts" thread instead of making up BS and thinking the owners are always in the right. I've asked you and the other blind anti-PA crowd to explain how another year or two, added to contract term affects what the owners hope to accomplish... I get the same rhetoric back and dancing around the question.

The Penguins were a casualty of Baldwin's poor decision making running the team into bankruptcy. He took a bridge loan from SMG leaving the team with only gate revenue and later leveraged off TV rights as well.

He then, foolishly, agt CP advice, gave Lemieux a guaranteed contract. Lemieux played only a couple of seasons of the contract, leaving close to 25-30m in dead money on the team books.

Then when the city approached him about building a new arena and going in on plan B with the Pirates and Steelers, he turned it down and instead accepted money for renovations for the Civic Arena.

Baldwin's poor choices put this team into bankruptcy, not BG. Again, facts.

God forbid a fair deal is worked out for both sides, like the NFL did.

It's much better to keep pushing past the 2000 games missed mark due to NHL labor strife, because the "players had it coming" and the owners want to get Fehr.

Sound logic.

Maybe when telling others to discuss and look at facts, you should stop trying to incorrectly state (or at least imply) that the only difference between the two are a 3 year contractual term limit. Connected, The PA also did not accept any meaningful variance limit.

The PA also did not accept a 10 year CBA ", and in Fact for nearly their purposes, didn't really change much from their previous proposal, they want the option to opt out at 6 years but locking in the owners for 8. (And I realize the Ownerseant a owner only opt out at 8 years on their 10 year CBA, but again, that's not as close as one wants to imply.

There was also the newly added issues of escrow limits, Mid-Level Cap exceptions, and compliance buyouts, all being ways for the players to receive more than 50% of HRR through the back door ON TOP of the make whole money.

And sorry, but eventually, either side is going to draw a line in the sand, especially when goalposts keep on being moved. Say Owners agree to a 7 year contact term limit, all of a sudden Don says 'we're so close, no way you don't come off your variance limit now'. Owners then reluctantly say fine well also to for a relaxed variance limit. Then Don says, we even closer, we can't let this thing to off the rails based on transitional issues and CBA term! The way you are suggesting them negotiate is overly simplistic, and a good way for the owners to get fleeced. From most accounts, it sounds as a good deal of owners already felt they were being fleeced, but Tananbaum etc. out their neck on the line, basically made what was probably a negotiating snafu in putting out what was already an offer stretching the limits and Don told the players to go for more. Bettman and company have made some mistakes these negotiations, no doubt. I don't feel the presser on Thursday however was one.

And stop trying to make any comparison to the NFL. First off, fair deal for both like the NFL did? The NFL players have the least player friendly CBA's in all of sports, and the differences between the NFL and NHL are so great that its mind boggling for one to even try to compare them. In fact, NHL players could sign the owners offer today (of the owners put it back out there) and claim victory as they will have negotiated themselves the most player friendly CBA in all of NA major league sports (MLB is more star friendly, but for the membership as a whole, not so much)

honest question-- seemingly most pens fans are "siding" with the owners. why do you think that is?

have we been misled by their PR campaign, or is it that most regular people are envious of athletes, or what?

Bro, I want the owners to win this. I've said it many times on here and the business board. I only had a problem with the honoring of contracts and that has been addressed I feel. The more the owners reel things in, the more the Pens keep their core in tact.

I have disdain for Bettman because he has no accountability for anything. From the Spano disaster to the Boots disaster, to us losing close to 2k games under his watch.

This league deserves a better leader.

I'm also tired of the ant-PA contingent who blindly side with the league. It's tiresome.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MtlPenFan

And you could argue those years under Goodenow were "payback". It wasn't that long ago that players were making 74% of HRR.

BG flipped on Lemieux for wanting to take 5m during his comeback and was worried it would affect top tier salaries. It was lame, but it happened.

Quote:

It's really, really nice bringing up the days when players used to have to have part time jobs during the off-season. There's no doubt the players got screwed, but as the generations changed, the landscape changed and the players soon got the upper hand.

Here's the problem though.

None of US were around then way back when. Hell, the current owners weren't even around, and neither were the players. It's like asking country A to continue to feel responsible for atrocities committed against country B when EVERYONE involved is long gone and reparations have been paid in full.

It's not only history, it's ancient history and quite irrelevant to what's going on today. I guarantee you that a guy like Upshall, tweeting his beach pics doesn't give a **** about Lindsay or Howe, and what they did for him.

All I know is I was around when the players pulled that strike stunt under Goodenow. I even remember my reaction in wanting nothing more than Goodenow to stand under a falling piano with the rest of the players. I also remember the Kariya holdout when he pretty much spent half the season whining about "getting paid"

There is actually a difference between history and ANCIENT history. Bringing up that the players weren't allowed copies of their contracts when TODAY, even a healthy scratch player like Bisonnette gets every amenity under the sun in ADDITION to 500K a year is laughable.

We can't ignore what lead to BG actions. The league was ****ing brutal and the owners were straight up shady mfers. They lied and cheated, and their backroom deals with Eagleson were disgusting.

All of this needs to be put in the past and hearing that the players have some kind of payback coming is lame. Neither side can plead innocence and both need to recognize the damage they have done.

It's already Monday bro. Daly and Fehr were in touch. Groundhogs day. I'm tired of it. Tired of twenty years of this garbage while I watch the NFL have labor peace during that span and another decade in the future of lasting labor peace.

Maybe when telling others to discuss and look at facts, you should stop trying to incorrectly state (or at least imply) that the only difference between the two are a 3 year contractual term limit. Connected, The PA also did not accept any meaningful variance limit.

I implicitly noted those issues were obvious bargain chips and placed (not a fact) next to it. Pay attention.

Quote:

The PA also did not accept a 10 year CBA ", and in Fact for nearly their purposes, didn't really change much from their previous proposal, they want the option to opt out at 6 years but locking in the players for 8. (And I realize the Ownerseant a owner only opt out at 8 years on their 10 year CBA, but again, that's not as close as one wants to imply.

There was also the newly added issues of escrow limits, Mid-Level Cap exceptions, and compliance buyouts, all being ways for the players to receive more than 50% of HRR through the back door ON TOP of the make whole money.

And sorry, but eventually, either side is going to draw a line in the sand, especially when goalposts keep on being moved. Say Owners agree to a 7 year contact term limit, all of a sudden Don says 'we're so close, no way you don't come off your variance limit now'. Owners then reluctantly say fine well also to for a relaxed variance limit. Then Don says, we even closer, we can't let this thing to off the rails based on transitional issues and CBA term! The way you are suggesting them negotiate is overly simplistic, and a good way for the owners to get fleeced. From most accounts, it sounds as a good deal of owners already felt they were being fleeced, but Tananbaum etc. out their neck on the line, basically made what was probably a negotiating snafu in putting out what was already an offer stretching the limits and Don told the players to go for more. Bettman and company have made some mistakes these negotiations, no doubt. I don't feel the presser on Thursday however was one.

You are speculating that is what Fehr will do. We know for a fact the owners once again ran from the table when they didn't get what they want. You aren't doing a deal by running away in a tiff every damn time.

This was plainly never the owners' intent and that, therefore, tells us that Suter and Parise were totally correct in their assessments: The owners approved all those deals more or less knowing that there was no way they would ever be obligated to pay the full value of them.

What's more, a handful of those deals were also signed for terms longer than what the owners want to allow under the new CBA.

They're pushing for five-year limits on all contracts, and that's probably something most owners knew well in advance of the NHL putting its foot down on the subject.

So isn't it funny that, say Taylor Hall got seven years at $6 million per, or Jordan Eberle got six at the same rate, three and two weeks before that CBA expired, respectively? Tyler Seguin also got six at $5.75 million, and John Carlson got the same at just under $4 million. (Note, by the way, that both of those were signed by teams with owners now heavily pushing the NHL agenda with regard to contract term limits.) Evander Kane's six-year deal, signed the day before the CBA expired, pays him $5.25 million a season.

That doesn't get into Kari Lehtonen's five-year, $29.5 million deal, or Milan Lucic's three-year, $18 million contract, though both were signed just days before the lockout began. What about the disbelief when Shane Doan got $5.3 million a year for four seasons on a 35-plus deal? No one's going to have to pay him that much now.

If I were a player I would be pissed — imagine you are weighing a couple of job offers and you like the city that Offer A is in but you go with Offer B because the pay just makes so much more sense ... and then your new boss tells you he's cutting your pay and you can't quit or go work elsewhere — and if I were a competitive NHL owner or GM who lost in the UFA sweepstakes for a guy like Parise or Suter to a team that made a ludicrous contract offer it never expected to fullfill due to CBA revisions, I'd be pissed as well.

But to answer your question, perhaps it's because the Penguins ownership team — as presented by media, including the news organization that is a major sponsor of the team — is presented as being one of the more reasonable ownership groups and the one that was widely credited with being instrumental in the two days of progress last week.